This page contains the results of various tests conducted on IOF Core including evaluations of consequences of axioms and rules in IOF Core, validations through competency questions, checking of data models, and benchmarking of the performance of various tools for IOF Core.
...
Table of contents
Table of Contents
minLevel
3
maxLevel
4
outline
false
type
list
printable
false
...
Allen’s Relations
IOF Core includes 7 interval relations, proposed by Allen (meets, before, overlaps, starts, finishes, occursDuring, and occursSimultaneouslyWith) and their inverses (except occursSimulataneouslyWith) applicable between ‘bfo:temporal interval' and ‘bfo:process’ instances. Along with these relations, a set of SWRL rules for inferring these relations among ‘bfo:temporal interval' and ‘bfo:process’ instances based on 'bfo:precedes’ relations among ‘bfo:temporal instances' and a set of property chains for the compositions of various Allen’s relations are also available separately from IOF Core.
Test Case # Allen-1 (Functional testing using competency questions)
Purpose
Functional testing of Allen’s relations using competency questions
Scope
Temporal relations among various processes and their influence on the participants of these processes.
In a factory producing metal parts, various machining processes, such as turning and milling, lapping, grinding along with laser marking, quality check and packing takes place. Workers are assigned to corresponding machine to carry out these operations for work orders on various metal parts. The company wants to monitor the assignment of workers along with machine allocations.
Data
Production data on 10 work orders. Important columns are:
Activity: Type of process
occurred
Resource: machine used
Start timestamp:
begining
beginning time of the process
Complete timestamp: end time of the process
Span: the duration of the process
Work Order: # of work order
Part Desc. : The type of the part produced
Worker ID: Identifier of the worker assigned to the machine for the process
The following competency questions should be available for query and the answers to the query should match the corresponding answers.
View file
name
ORSD-core-allens.xlsx
Pre-process steps
The data is loaded to GraphDB (https://www.ontotext.com/products/graphdb ) modeled using IOF Core (spring release candidate) and SWRL rules (see Pre-process steps of Test Case # Allen-2).
System configuration
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9750H CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.59 GHz with 32.0 GB RAM
Methodology
Each CQs are tested with the following SPARQL queries as mentioned in the following table using https://www.ontotext.com/products/graphdb workbench on the KG below.
View file
name
prod-data-inf.rdf
Result
All tests are passed as shown in the following table.
CQ Identifier
SPARQL Query
Result
core-s1-1
View file
name
test-core-s1-1.q
Passed
core-s1-2
View file
name
test-core-s1-2.q
Passed
core-s1-3
View file
name
test-core-s1-3.q
Passed
core-s1-4
View file
name
test-core-s1-4.q
Passed
core-s1-5
View file
name
test-core-s1-5.q
Passed
core-s1-6
View file
name
test-core-s1-6.q
Passed
core-s1-7
View file
name
test-core-s1-7.q
Passed
core-s1-8
View file
name
test-core-s1-8.q
Passed
core-s1-9
View file
name
test-core-s1-9.q
Passed
core-s1-10
View file
name
test-core-s1-10.q
Passed
Test Case # Allen-2 (Inferences by SWRL rules and inverse axioms)
Purpose
Testing the consequence of SWRL rules for asserting Allen’s relations
Scope
Temporal relations among time instances, intervals, and processes.
In a factory producing metal parts, various machining processes, such as turning and milling, lapping, grinding along with laser marking, quality check and packing takes place. Workers are assigned to corresponding machine to carry out these operations for work orders on various metal parts. The company wants to monitor the assignment of workers along with machine allocations.
Data
Production data on 10 work orders. Important columns are:
Activity: process occurred
Resource: machine used
Start timestamp: begining time of the process
Complete timestamp: end time of the process
Span: the duration of the process
Work Order: # of work order
Part Desc. : The type of the part produced
Worker ID: Identifier of the worker assigned to the machine for the process
As Rules 8-12, 14, and 15 requires other rules to succeed, only the consequences of these rules are evaluated.
For each rule, at least one example of consequence is searched in the inferred ontology.
The rule is considered successful if the rule is found in one of the explanation for the consequence and the inference is based on correct assertion.
Result
All tests are passed (see in the table below)
#
Targer
Explanation
Result
1
Rule S8
Image Modified
Passed
2
Rule S9
Image Modified
Passed
3
Rule S10
Image Modified
Passed
4
Rule S11
Image Modified
P41 LaserMarking
Passed
5
Rule S12
Image Modified
Passed
6
Rule S14
Image Modified
Passed
7
Rule S15
Image Modified
Passed
Gain of Role and Loss of Role
“Gain of Role” (GOR) and “Loss of Role” (LOR) are two new process types included in the IOF to provide the ability to model when a bearer starts bearing the role and when it loses the role as well as the duration for which the bearer bears the role.
Test Case # role-1 (Functional testing using competency questions)
Purpose
Functional testing of GOR and LOR using competency questions
Scope
Classification of GOR and LOR and query based on temporal durations of Roles borne by different bearers and other contemporary events
Three operators are employed at a control room that remains operational for 24 hours. Operators work in three shifts of around 8 hours each having around 10 minutes for change-over between shifts. The following entries were recorded in the logbook on 28th May 2016. As per policy, the shift starts for an operator as soon as she arrives in the control room and ends when she leaves the room.
Data
[2016-05-28T00:03:00Z] Operator 1 arrived for change-over.
[2016-05-28T00:10:00Z] Operator 3 left the control.
[2016-05-28T03:24:00Z] Incident 1 is observed.
[2016-05-28T03:26:00Z] Incident 1 is stopped.
[2016-05-28T07:58:00Z] Operator 2 arrived for change-over.
[2016-05-28T08:07:00Z] Operator 1 left the control.
[2016-05-28T16:01:00Z] Operator 3 arrived for change-over.
[2016-05-28T16:05:00Z] Incident 2 is observed.
[2016-05-28T16:08:00Z] Operator 2 left the control.
[2016-05-28T23:43:00Z] Incident 3 is observed.
Test criteria
The following competency questions should be available for query and the answers to the query should match the corresponding answers.
View file
name
ORSD-core-gor-lor.xlsx
Pre-process steps
The data is manually modeled in Protege (https://protege.stanford.edu/ v 5.5.0) using IOF Core (spring release candidate).
All tests are passed as shown in the following table.
CQ Identifier
SPARQL Query
Result
core-s1-1
View file
name
test-core-s1-1.q
Passed
core-s1-2
View file
name
test-core-s1-2.q
Passed
core-s1-3
View file
name
test-core-s1-3.q
Passed
core-s1-4
View file
name
test-core-s1-4.q
Passed
core-s1-5
View file
name
test-core-s1-5.q
Passed
core-s1-6
test-core-s1-4 (change filter by incident3)
Passed
Mapping with OWL-Time
IOF-Core includes a provision to assert calendar date and clock time to the instances of bfo:Temporal Instant by using two sub-classes of ValueExpression: TemporalInstantValueExpression and TemporalIntervalValueExpression and a data property hasDateTimeValue which can link a xsd:DateTime to TemporalInstantValueExpression. However, both TemporalInstantValueExpression and TemporalIntervalValueExpression classes are mapped to https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/ classes to allow users to utilize the capability of https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/ for asserting calendar and clock time as well as durations in various formats, granularity and systems.
Test Case # time-1 (Validation of data modelled using both IOF-Core and OWL-Time)
Purpose
Test the ability to consistently use https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/ time description class and properties in conjunction with IOF-Core constructs
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-9750H CPU @ 2.60GHz 2.59 GHz with 32.0 GB RAM
Methodology
The assertions in the following file are compared with the assertions given in https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time/#examples in Turtle format as well as reasoned for checking consistency.
View file
name
time-example1.ttl
Result
All tests are passed as shown in the following table. The ontology was processed without issues by Hermit reasoner in 5651 ms.